alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Helen K. HADLEY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 28430.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 27, 1956.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 10, 1956.

*718B. F. Patterson, San Antonio, E. Colley Sullivan, Dallas, for appellant.

’ Hubert "W. Green,1 Jr., Crim. Dist. Atty., Elbert Hooper, Jr., Asst. Crim. Dist. Atty.’, San Antonio, and Leon' B. Douglas, State’s ‘Atty., Austin, for the State.

DAVIDSON, Jucfec..

This is a conviction for theft ofVman-’s suit of the value in excess of $50; the punishment, four'years in'the penitentiary.

-The state’s testimony .shows that appellant was found in the possession of a suit, of clothes which had been recently stolen from Joske’s in San Antonio. The circumstances abundantly authorize the conclusion that appellant was a “shoplifter.’.’ and that, she acquired the suit by theft.

.When the jury was ready to. report, appellant was -not- in the courtroom and could not be found. The trial- court, received the verdict 'of the.j.ury in her absence. :

.. It, is insisted; that the -receipt of the verdict in appellant’s absence was ..prohibited by Aft. 692, C.C.P.

It,will be noted that said, article requires that the defendant in a felony case “must be present when the verdict is read unless his absence is wilful. or voluntary.”

Here, appellant was absent from the courtroom of'her own volition, in so far as this record -is concerned;' there is nothing to .show that her'absence was other than voluntary on ‘her part;

We are unable to agree that the trial' court erred in receiving the verdict- in appellant’s absence. -. See: Slaughter v. State, 151 Tex.Cr.R., 156, 205. S.W.2d 781.

Other questions presented have been examined,' and are ' overruled without discussion.

The judgment is affirmed.

On Appellant’s Motion for Rehearing

’■ BELCHER, Commissioner.

Appellant insists that the evidence-is insufficient to,.show--that the, man’s suit alleged to have been stolen was of the value of more than $50 at the time of the alleged taking.

Mr.- Everts, buyer and- manager of the-men’-s clothing department-'at Joske’s, testified that he' p'aid $60 for’the suit in question - which- retailed -to the consumer for *719$100i This testimony -was sufficient to show that the suit was of the value of more than $50. >

The complaint of the district attorney’s argument to the jury that “an eye dropper and a spoon on which the handle was bent into a curve” together with the remark “you know what they usé that for” cannot be sustained as the first statement is supported -by the evidence admitted without objection and the latter remark is a reasonable deduction from such ■evidence.

The motion for rehearing is overruled.

Opinion approved -by the Court.
EXHIBIT
32.1





STATEMENT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


BY
PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER








I,
Keith Brackpool, herby certify, to my knowledge, that:





1.
the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of Cadiz Inc. for the year ended
December 31, 2007 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended; and





2.
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Cadiz
Inc.





IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Statement as of the date
first written above.





Dated:
March 14, 2008





/s/ Keith
Brackpool


Keith
Brackpool


Chairman,
Chief Executive Officer
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14** 

**- 7**  **044**

ALONZO DENNIS COPELAND, JR.

,

P laintiff

- Appellant

,

v.

J. SHROM /RN, Registered Nurse; A. FREEMAN, Registered Nurse; C/O CLARK, Lieutenant; ESTATE OF DOCTOR WARREN

,

Defendants

- Appellee s ,

and

MS. MASSENBURG, ex. Institutional Ombudsman; MS. C. BOONE, ex. Institutional Ombudsman; MR. R. WOODSON, Regional Ombudsman; DOCTOR WARREN, Physician/Doctor,

Defendants

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Ea stern District of Virginia , at Norfolk

. Rebecca Beach Smith

, Chief District Judge. ( 2 :1 3

- cv

- 0 0 584

- RBS

- DEM )

Submitted : November 18, 2014 Decided: December 18, 2014

Before SHEDD, AGEE , and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Dismiss ed by un published per curiam opinion

.2 Alonzo Dennis Copeland, Jr. , Appellant Pro Se. Kate Elizabeth Dwyre, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.3 PER CURIAM:

Alonzo Dennis Copela nd , Jr., appeals the district

court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint

as time

- barred. The district court has granted Copeland’ s Fed.

R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion

, vacated its dismissed order, and the

complaint reinstated . Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal as

moot. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

before this court and argument would n ot aid the decisional

process.

DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 32

                          CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                           18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                           AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

   In connection with the Quarterly Report of Tell-A-Tale Incorporated (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2003, as filed  with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I,
Anthony  N  DeMint, President and Chief Accounting Officer  of  the  Company,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to  Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     (2)  The  information  contained in the Report fairly presents,  in  all
          material   respects,  the  financial  condition  and   results   of
          operations of the Company.



                              /s/ Anthony N. DeMint
                              Anthony n. DeMint
                              President and Chief Accounting Officer
                              August 4, 2003
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.2

   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 OF
                           ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K
                                       OF
                                BELMONT BANCORP.
                      FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2002

The undersigned is the Chief Financial Officer of Belmont Bancorp. (the
"Issuer"). This Certification is made pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. This Certification accompanies the Annual Report on
Form 10-K of the Registrant for the annual period ended December 31, 2002.

I certify that the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the annual period ended
December 31, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that the
information contained in such Annual Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Issuer and will be retained by the Issuer and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

This Certification is executed as of March 21, 2003.

                                                     /s/ Jane Marsh
                                                     --------------
                                                     Chief Financial Officer
#### Westenberger, Appellee, *v.*Industrial Commission of Ohio, Appellant.

(No. 27320

Decided March 29, 1939.)

*212*Messrs. Silbaugh <& Silbaugh*and *Messrs. Wardlaw, Gertner & Armstrong,*for appellee.

*Mr. Herbert 8. Duffy*and *Mr. T. J. Herbert,*attorneys general, *Mr. Eugene Carlin, Mr. C. L. Hawthorne*and *Mr. E. P. Fellcer,*for appellant.

By the Court.

The Industrial Commission contends that, inasmuch as that part of Section 1465-68, General Code, which includes members of partnerships as employees within the provisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, was declared unconstitutional by this court in the case of *Goldberg*v. *Industrial Commission,*131 Ohio St., 399, 3 N. E. (2d), 364, the widow has no basis for an action for compensation.

Counsel for the widow contend that, having accepted premiums based upon the payroll which included the decedent’s salary, the commission is estopped to deny the constitutional validity of the last paragraph of Section 1465-68, General Code.

We agree with counsel for both parties to this litigation that the question of estoppel was not before this court in the *Goldberg case.*

In 1925 the General Assembly amended Section 1465-68, General Code (111 Ohio Laws, 218), to include *213coverage of members of partnerships under certain circumstances. The Industrial Commission was thereafter compelled to accept premiums from partnerships and to pay for injury to or death of partner-employees. In 1936 this court declared unconstitutional the amended portion of Section 1465-68, General Code, and the commission was.thereupon deprived of rights and duties under that amended section.

The rights of employees and their dependents in the Workmen’s Compensation Law are not governed by common law, but are only such as may be conferred by the General Assembly. 42 Ohio Jurisprudence, page 575, Section 2; *Industrial Commission*v. *Kamrath,*118 Ohio St., 1, 160 N. E., 470; *Bozzelli*v. *Industrial Commission,*122 Ohio St., 201, 171 N. E., 108.

When this court declared Section 1465-68, General Code, unconstitutional, the duties of the Industrial Commission ceased with reference to such partner-employee claims, and the rights of claimants likewise terminated.

*Judgment reversed and final judgment for appellant.*

Weygandt, C. J., Day, Zimmerman, Williams, Myers, Matthias and Hart, JJ., concur.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Gulf Coast Oil & Gas, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ending March 31, 2008 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Rahim Rayani, Chief Executive Officer, President and Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the
best of my knowledge:

         1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.


Date:  May 15, 2008
                                   /s/ Rahim Rayani
                                   ----------------
                                   Rahim Rayani
                                   Chief Executive Officer and President
                                   Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0001109531
<NAME>                        DIAMOND TRIUMPH AUTO GLASS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                  1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                         3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                  JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                    MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                                   39
<SECURITIES>                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        14,809
<ALLOWANCES>                                            956
<INVENTORY>                                          12,214
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     30,613
<PP&E>                                               18,081
<DEPRECIATION>                                       10,908
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       88,575
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                20,568
<BONDS>                                             102,500
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                44,338
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                                 10
<OTHER-SE>                                         (78,841)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         88,575
<SALES>                                              44,665
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     44,665
<CGS>                                                13,864
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        39,903
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         30
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    2,806
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                       1,994
<INCOME-TAX>                                            797
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 (1,197)
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       (504)
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                            693
<EPS-BASIC>                                               0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                             0


</TABLE>
ACCEPTED06-15-00022-CVSIXTH COURT OF APPEALSTEXARKANA, TEXAS5/19/2015 9:55:53 AMDEBBIE AUTREYCLERK
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Alton Thomas Davis, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

November 22, 2010 

d1115 

Order 

 

November 22, 2010 

141577 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 141577 

 COA: 296529 

Midland CC: 04-001853-FH 

BRIAN SCOTT URBANAWIZ, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 22, 2010 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
EXHIBIT 24.1

POWER OF ATTORNEY

(Annual Report on Form 10-K)

The undersigned, an officer and/or director of Electro Scientific Industries, Inc., constitutes and appoints Nicholas Konidaris, John Metcalf and Kerry Mustoe, and each
of them, his or her true and lawful attorney and agent to do any and all acts and things and execute in his or her name as an officer or director of the Company the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 2, 2007 and any and all
amendments thereto, and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission; and the undersigned does hereby ratify and confirm all that said attorneys and agents and
each of them shall do or cause to be done by virtue hereof. Any one of said attorneys or agents shall have, and may exercise, all powers conferred.

Dated: July 26, 2007.



/s/ FREDERICK A. BALLFrederick A. Ball
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6338

TEKOA T. GLOVER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus E. RICHARD BAZZLE, Warden; HENRY MCMASTER, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Bristow Marchant, Magistrate Judge. (CA-03-2689-0-23BD) Submitted: May 27, 2004 Decided: June 4, 2004 Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tekoa T. Glover, Appellant Pro Se. Henry Dargan McMaster, Attorney, General, Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, John William McIntosh, Assistant Attorney General, Derrick K. McFarland, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Tekoa T. Glover seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s order denying his motions for speedy resolution of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition, for bond, and for joinder of parties. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order Glover seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
### SAT Report PMN Number: P-13-0180 SAT Date: 1/4/2013 Print Date: 2/4/2013

Related cases :

Concern levels : Type of Concern: Health Eco Comments Level of Concern: 2 3

Persistence Bioaccum Toxicity Comments 1 2 1 Linear 2 3 1 Branched

Exposure Based Review : Health: Ecotox: N o
Routes of exposure : Health: Dermal Inhalation Ecotox: All releases to water Fate: ; Keywords : Keywords: IRR/CORR-S,E,L,MM; AQUATOX
Summary of Assessment :

Fate : Fate Summary: P-13-0180-5 FATE: Estimations for low weight
Liquid with MP < 25 C (E) log Kow = 5.97 (E); S = Dispersible /0.3 mg/L at 25 C (E) VP < 1.0E-6 torr at 25 C (E) BP > 400 C (E) H < 1.00E-8 (E)log Koc = 5.04 (E) log Fish BCF = 2.2 (E) log Fish BAF = 2.7 (E) POTW removal (%) = 90 via sorption and biodeg Time for complete ultimate aerobic biodeg = Linear wk; Highly branched ≥ mo Sorption to soils/sediments = v.strong PBT Potential: Linear P1B2; Highly branched P2B3 *CEB FATE: Migration to ground water = negl

Health : Health Summary: Absorption is poor from the skin, moderate from the GI tract, and good from the lung (analog). Concern for severe irritation and possible corrosion from the amines.

Ecotox :
Test Organism Test Type Test End Point Predicted Measured Comments

fish 96-h LC50 * daphnid 48-h LC50 * green algal 96-h EC50 0.01 fish

_ chronic value 0.002 daphnid

_ chronic value 0.004

algal

_ chronic value 0.004

Sewage Sludge 3-h EC50

_ Sewage Sludge

_ Chronic Value _

Ecotox Values Comments: Predictions are based on SARs for Aliphatic Amines; SAR class = Aliphatic Amines; log Kow = 6.0; S = 0.0003 g/L at 20 C, dispersible; p H7; liquid with unknown mp (P); effective concentrations based on 100% active ingredients and measured concentrations; hardness <150.0 mg/L as CaCO3; and TOC <2.0 mg/L;

Factors Values Comments Assessment Factor 10 Concentration of Concern ( p pb) 1

SARs Aliphatic Amines, Amides SAR Class Aliphatic Amines Ecotox Category Aliphatic Amines

Ecotox Factors Comments:SAT Chair: L Keifer 564-8916
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-6065

FRANK ERVIN ALTIZER, JR.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

RONALD J. ANGELONE; RICHARD A. YOUNG; GEORGE

DEEDS,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge.

(CA-96-3-R)

Submitted: May 16, 1996 Decided: June 3, 1996

Before RUSSELL, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Frank Ervin Altizer, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Altizer v. Angelone, No. CA-96-3-R (W.D. Va. Jan. 3, 1996).

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court

and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Global Casinos, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Frank L. Jennings, Principal Executive and Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                              
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

/s/ Frank L. Jennings                               Frank L. Jennings, Principal Executive 
and Financial Officer
October 12, 2004
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            JUL-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                               AUG-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                 JUL-31-1998
<CASH>                                            11,574
<SECURITIES>                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      8,674
<ALLOWANCES>                                           0
<INVENTORY>                                            0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  20,248
<PP&E>                                         1,705,651
<DEPRECIATION>                                   350,154
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,390,412
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             60,596
<BONDS>                                                0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                            0
<COMMON>                                          16,841
<OTHER-SE>                                             0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1,390,412
<SALES>                                                0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   1,377
<CGS>                                                  0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    415,636
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 391,554
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (805,813)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       1,368
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (807,181)
<DISCONTINUED>                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                        0
<CHANGES>                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (807,181)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      (0.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          0
        


</TABLE>